In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.

The move comes a few years after the administration became the first in history to dispatch a U.S. Attorney General to personallyreassure Muslimsthat the Department of Justice (DOJ) is dedicated to protecting them. In the unprecedented event, Attorney General Eric Holder assured a San Francisco-based organization (Muslim Advocates)….

“Muslims and Arab Americans have helped build and strengthen our nation,” Holder said after expressing that he is “grateful” to have Muslims as a partner in promoting tolerance, ensuring public safety and protecting civil rights.

Holder’s message was reinforced by a federal attorney and an FBI agent.

As reported by The Tullahoma News, Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Knoxville Division) warned Americans that they can be prosecuted for “violating civil rights” when they post inflammatory commentary targeted at Muslims.

Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights “as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion” are subject to federal jurisdiction and prosecution. Referring to a 2013 Facebook posting by Tennessee Coffee County Commissioner Barry West of a picture of a man pointing a double-barreled shotgun at a camera lens with the caption saying, “How to Wink at a Muslim,” Killian said, “If a Muslim had posted ‘How to Wink at a Christian,’ could you imagine what would have happened? We need to educate people about Muslims and their civil rights, and as long as we’re here, they’re going to be protected.”

Eric Holder said he’s “grateful” to have Muslims as a partner in promoting tolerance, ensuring public safety and protecting civil rights? Holder should tell that to:

Anwar al-Awlaki(April 21, 1971 – September 30, 2011) was a U.S.-born Islamic imam and a leader of the al-Qaeda terrorist group, whom the Saudi news station Al Arabiya called the “bin Laden of the Internet.”

Described by U.S. government officials as al-Qaeda’s senior talent recruiter and motivator, al-Awlaki was intimately involved in a number of major terrorist activities, including:

As imam at a mosque in Falls Church, Virginia (2001–02), which had 3,000 members, al-Awlaki had spoken with and preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers, who were al-Qaeda members.

In 2001, al-Awlaki presided at the funeral of the mother of convicted Fort Hood shooter and U.S. Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan, with whom al-Awlaki exchanged extensive email in 2008–09 before the Fort Hood shootings.

After al-Awlaki went into hiding in 2006, he was associated with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian who attempted the 2009 Christmas Day bombing of an American airliner. Al-Awlaki was allegedly involved in planning that attack.

In 2009, al-Awlaki was promoted to the rank of “regional commander” within al-Qaeda. He repeatedly called for jihad against the United States.

In April 2010, the Obama regime placed al-Awlaki — a U.S. citizen — on a list of terrorists whom the C.I.A. was authorized to kill. On September 30, 2011, al-Awlaki was killed by an American drone in Yemen. Two weeks later, al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen who was born in Denver, was also killed by a CIA-led drone strike in Yemen.

Given al-Awlaki’s sordid history, it is curious — to say the least — that in 2002, none other than the same al-Awlaki was an invited speaker at a U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) luncheon.

This astonishing discovery is the result of the tireless efforts of the nonpartisan citizen watchdog group, Judicial Watch.

According to the FBI surveillance log for February 5, 2002, at 11:30 am, “Aulaqi boarded the Metro train, blue line north for the Pentagon.” At 11:32 am, “Aulaqi exited the Metro train, walked through the turnstyle [sic] and greeted two unidentified white females.” At 11:40 am, “Aulaqi and the two unidentified females walked through the train station, onto the escalator, walked southwest and west adjacent to the Pentagon, up the steps and walked northeast towards the entrance to the Pentagon.” And at 12:00 pm, “Surveillance discontinued at the Pentagon.”

The 262 pages of documents were obtained by Judicial Watch pursuant to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the FBI and the Department of State seeking records related to the al-Qaeda leader killed in a CIA-led U.S. drone attack.

According to Fox News, the invitation list for the Pentagon luncheon where al-Awlaki was a featured speaker included up to 70 top DOD staffers, including Deputy General Counsel Charles Allen, former Deputy General Counsel Whit Cobb, former principal Deputy General Counsel Dan Dell’Orto, former General Counsel William Haynes, Deputy General Counsel Paul Koffsky and former deputy General Counsel Douglas Larsen. The London Daily Mail reported that “the Defense Department lawyer who vetted al-Awlaki wrote that she ‘had the privilege of hearing one of Mr. Awlaki’s presentations in November and was impressed by both the extent of his knowledge and by how he communicated that information and handled a hostile element in the audience’.”

According to FOIA documents previously obtained from the FBI by Judicial Watch, the FBI was aware as far back as September 27, 2001, that al-Aulaqi may have purchased airplane tickets for three of the 9/11 terrorist hijackers, including mastermind Mohammed Atta. On October 10, 2002, al-Aulaqi was detained at New York’s JFK airport under a warrant for passport fraud, a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.However, the FBI ordered al-Aulaqi’s release, even though the arrest warrant was still active at the time of his detention.

To date, Judicial Watch’s litigation has resulted in the release of more than 1,800 pages of responsive records, many of which were previously classified. The documents also raise serious questions as to the nature of the relationship between al-Aulaqi and the U.S. government. As Fox News reported on August 23, 2013, “A four year investigation by Fox News, and newly declassified documents obtained separately by Judicial Watch, are raising questions over the U.S. government’s handling of Anwar al-Awlaki, and whether it tried to recruit the radical American cleric as an intelligence source in 2002.” Outgoing FBI Director Robert Mueller did not dismiss the possibility, telling Fox News, “I am not personally familiar with any effort to recruit Anwar al-Awlaki as an asset – that does not mean to say there was not an effort at some level of the Bureau (FBI) or another agency to do so.”

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said: “These FBI logs document Keystone-cop incompetence by our national security establishment. For the FBI to follow a known terrorist to the Pentagon where the terrorist has a high-level meeting is beyond comprehension. It is becoming increasingly apparent that there’s more than meets the eye in Obama’s assassination of al-Aulaqi. We were told that he was a terrorist, when in fact he was also probably a U.S. government informant. Did Obama know about this? Congress and the media need to get on the ball.”

Stars and Stripes: For Army Staff Sgt. Shawn Manning, Nov. 5, 2009, was a routine day at Fort Hood, Texas, waiting for a health checkup before his scheduled deployment to Afghanistan. Suddenly, he heard someone yell “Allahu akbar” — Arabic for “God is great” — before the first of six bullets slammed into his chest, piercing his right lung and liver.

Almost four years later, Manning is engaged in another fight — for the military’s Purple Heart, bestowed on soldiers injured in battle. The court-martial of Major Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder, is stoking calls to label the shooting rampage an act of terrorism and to award Purple Hearts, which carry federal benefits.

“This wasn’t a random act of violence where a guy was having a bad day,” Manning, 37, said in a phone interview.

The dispute over the Purple Hearts is part of a broader national debate over what constitutes a battleground in an age when terrorism can inflict casualties at home.

With jury selection under way this week in the trial of Hasan, an American-born Muslim, U.S. House Republicans and the victims’ families argue that the Fort Hood attack was the first terrorist incident on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001.

The Obama administration characterizes the attack as workplace violence and says branding it terrorism would jeopardize Hasan’s right to a fair trial. Other critics say giving the decoration to the Fort Hood victims could open up future claims for the award and, in the Pentagon’s view, change the criteria for the honor.

It’s the latest skirmish between the White House and Republicans over how to handle prosecutions of suspected terrorists. In 2011, under political pressure, the administration rescinded its decision to try accused Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in federal court in New York; a military tribunal is hearing his case in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The Republican-led House has passed legislation that would force the Pentagon to award the Fort Hood victims the Purple Heart and the government benefits that come with it. A similar provision, included in last year’s defense measure, was removed during negotiations with the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel” to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant” retirement benefits, according to the legal filing.

Pvt. Justin Johnson was shot in the back and foot, puncturing his lungs, fracturing his ribs and breaking bones in his foot. A bullet is still lodged in his chest, according to the filing.

Hasan, representing himself against charges of premeditated murder and attempted murder, told the military judge, Col. Tara Osborn, that he shot the soldiers because they posed an immediate threat to Taliban leaders in Afghanistan.

The so-called “defense of others” strategy would have required him to show that killing was necessary to prevent the immediate harm or death of others. With Hasan potentially facing the death penalty or life without parole if convicted, Osborn barred him from using that defense.

“The accused is innocent until proven guilty” in all uniformed code of military justice cases, Lt. Col. Tom Crosson, a Pentagon spokesman, said in an emailed statement. Citing “the integrity of the ongoing court-martial proceedings,” he declined to characterize the incident.

Service members killed or hurt when a hijacked airliner struck the Pentagon on Sept. 11 were awarded the Purple Heart. Then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld called it “the first attack on our capital by a foreign enemy since the War of 1812.”

Colby Vokey, a Dallas-area retired Marine Corps lieutenant colonel now in private legal practice, said Hasan doesn’t qualify as an enemy combatant because he’s a U.S. soldier. “There are soldiers and Marines killed in dangerous situations, yet no Purple Heart is awarded,” Vokey said in an interview. “It has to be a result of enemy action.”

The Pentagon would be taking on a “totally unnecessary” burden to show that the Fort Hood attack was an act of terrorism, said Morris Davis, chief prosecutor for the military commission at Guantanamo Bay from 2005 to 2007 who now teaches at Howard University School of Law in Washington.

While labeling it terrorism “may have some political appeal,” he said, from a legal perspective it makes more sense to treat it as a “straight-up traditional murder charge.”

In the federal court filing, Sher’s clients claim that government agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, had indications that Hasan possessed “strongly held jihadi ideology and religious motives for the Fort Hood terror attack.”

They allege that Hasan self-identified as a “soldier of Allah,” that he openly supported suicide attacks against non- Muslims, and received religious and operational inspiration from Anwar Al-Awlaki, an American citizen and al-Qaida propagandist who was killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen in 2011.

“This was a terrorist attack against American soldiers and this guy should have been tried a long time ago,” said Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee.

The House defense authorization bill for fiscal 2014, H.R. 1960, which passed 315-108 on June 14, would require the Defense Department to award Purple Hearts to all service members killed or wounded in the Fort Hood shootings.

The White House objected to the proposal, saying in a June 11 statement: “This provision is inconsistent with the award criteria for the Purple Heart.” The companion Senate measure, approved 23-3 by the Armed Services Committee on June 13, is silent on the matter.

Still, negotiations over the provision may be different this time, said a Senate aide who asked not to be named because no official decisions have been made. Senate Republicans are closely watching Hasan’s court-martial and may press for the award depending on the outcome, the aide said.

Manning, who tried to take cover behind a desk during the shooting, has begun a new chapter in his life. After almost three years of being unable to work, he’s now a mental health counselor at Fort Lewis in Washington State.

He said he thinks about the shooting every day, and crowds bother him so he no longer socializes outside his home. “Everything is more difficult to do,” he said.

No matter what your take on Purple Heart recipients’ qualifications, it’s no doubt this was a terror attack. Our soldiers injured/killed and their families deserve the best care/benefits for risking their lives in the line of duty.

Like this:

The evidence is mounting that the Obama regime at best coddles radical Muslims, at worst it’s actively supporting and arming them. To wit:

The Obama regime refuses to call US Army psychologist Nidal Hasan, who perpetrated the worst shooting ever to take place on a U.S. military base, at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009 — an Islamic jihadist. Despite eyewitness testimonies that Hasan had shouted “Allahu Akbar! (Allah is Great!)” before opening fire, killing 13 and wounding another 29; and regardless of internal Army reports indicating Hasan’s fellow officers had reported his outspoken sympathy with radical Islam since 2005.

In August 2011, afraid of offending the delicate sensibilities of Muslims, the U.S. Marine Corps banned Marines serving in Afghanistan from — I kid you not — audible farting.

In Sept. 2012, a highly-decorated 18-year veteran Army officer, Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley, was fired from teaching a course on Islam because he had the temerity of actually teaching “negative aspects” the truth about Islam. (More evidence at the end of this post.)

The latest is a new U.S. Army handbook for troops deployed to the Middle East, forbidding our soldiers from making derogatory comments about the extremist Taliban, pedophilia, or Islam in general, as well as any comment approving of rights for women.

Aren’t we fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan? So if the Obama regime were in power then, U.S. soldiers in the Second World War would have been barred from making “derogatory comments” about Hitler and the Nazis.

Here is a strong indicator that the Obama Administration’s crusade to appease Islam has gone too far; a new U.S. military handbook for troops deployed to the Middle East orders soldiers not to make derogatory comments about the Taliban or criticize pedophilia, among other outrageous things.

It gets better; the new manual, which is around 75 pages, suggests that Western ignorance of Afghan culture— not Taliban infiltration—is responsible for the increase in deadly attacks by Afghan soldiers against the coalition forces.

The soon-to-be-released Army handbook is still being drafted, but [The Wall St. Journal] … got a sneak preview and published an article [for subscribers only] that should infuriate the American taxpayers funding the never-ending war on terror. The manual is being created because someone with authority bought the theory that cultural insensitivity is driving insider attacks on U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

More than three dozen insider attacks have killed 63 members of the U.S.-led coalition this year, according to the article, and some blame “American cultural ignorance.” The bottom line is that troops may experience social-cultural shock and/or discomfort when interacting with Afghan security forces, the new military handbook says. “Better situational awareness/understanding of Afghan culture will help better prepare [troops] to more effectively partner and to avoid cultural conflict that can lead toward green-on-blue violence.”

The draft leaked to the newspaper offers a list of “taboo conversation topics” that soldiers should avoid, including “making derogatory comments about the Taliban,” “advocating women’s rights,” “any criticism of pedophilia,” “directing any criticism towards Afghans,” “mentioning homosexuality and homosexual conduct” or “anything related to Islam.”

At least one high-ranking military official had the backbone to publicly criticize the new manual, albeit through a spokesperson. U.S. Marine General John Allen, the top commander in Afghanistan, doesn’t endorse it and rejected a proposed forward drafted by Army officials in his name. “He does not approve of its contents,” according to a military spokesman quoted in the story.

Earlier this year the Obama Administration changed the way federal agents are trained to combat terrorism and violent extremism by eliminating all materials that shed a negative light on Muslims. Under White House orders, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) destroyed instructional material that characterizes Muslims as prone to violence or terrorism in a government-wide call to end Islamophobia.

Under Obama practically every major federal agency has been ordered to participate in Muslim outreach initiatives, including the Justice Department with a special program to protect Islamic civil rights, Homeland Security meetings with extremist Muslim organizations and the nation’s space agency (NASA) with an unprecedented mission to focus on Muslim diplomacy.

Additionally, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed a special order to allow the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties long banned them from the U.S. and the administration sent an America-bashing mosque leader (Feisal Abdul Rauf) who blames U.S. foreign policy for the 9/11 attacks on a Middle Eastern outreach mission. The Obama Administration even ordered a government-funded meal program for home-bound seniors to offer halal cuisine prepared according to Islamic law.

About U.S. Marine General John Allen who has refused to endorse the new Muslim-appeasing military manual: This is the same Gen. Allen whose previously-announced promotion is now indefinitely postponed, and who will soon be replaced by Gen. Joseph Dunford as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. See “Obama purges U.S. military command (Part 1),” Dec. 3, 2012.